It Isn't Easy Being Pink: There Is No Neutral Ground When It Comes to Planned Parenthood
Editor's note: This is not today's only article on Komen and Planned Parenthood. In addition to our news report, you might also enjoy Matthew Lee Anderson's examination of "The Politics of Breast Cancer," Mollie Ziegler Hemingway's look at "The Komen Fiasco's Silver Lining," and Russell Moore's warning on "the wrong lessons to draw from the Komen-Planned Parenthood debacle."
Crash and burn. The policy reversal by the Susan G. Komen Foundation for the Cure, which now means that its funding of Planned Parenthood will continue, is nothing less than a public relations disaster for the organization. More than that, the decision reveals a basic lack of moral conviction when it comes to the Planned Parenthood issue—and that is a story unto itself.
Just days ago, faced with growing controversy, Komen sought to break its relationship with Planned Parenthood, to which it had provided an annual grant of $700,000 for breast cancer screenings. Komen did not state the decision in these terms, of course, but instead described the decision in terms of a new policy not to fund any organization under legal investigation. It just so happens that Planned Parenthood is currently the focus of a congressional investigation.
For years, Komen has established a reputation as the nation's leading advocacy group dedicated to fighting the tragedy of breast cancer. It has made the color pink synonymous with the issue, and it has protected its turf energetically. Bridges, skyscrapers, and waterways have been turned pink in order to bring attention and funding to the fight against breast cancer deaths.
But breast cancer is not an isolated issue, and the group's funding of breast cancer screenings by Planned Parenthood could never be kept morally isolated from all that Planned Parenthood represents—and that is the machinery of death for the unborn.
Komen's decision to cease the funding of Planned Parenthood was bungled from the start. The organization lacked the confidence to stand on moral grounds and deny the funding because of Planned Parenthood's involvement with abortion. Instead, it tried to finesse the issue by adopting a policy that, on its face, was really not about Planned Parenthood at all. The ruse did not work.
The first sign of trouble came when pro-life groups applauded the decision. Komen was clearly uncomfortable with that attention, but it could do nothing to stop it—no one believed that the decision was not about Planned Parenthood and its controversies.
The real trouble came when Planned Parenthood and its powerful friends saw their big opportunity—to pressure Komen into capitulation. This was accomplished in record time. In less than a week, Komen caved and the deed was done. Planned Parenthood flexed its muscles and twisted all the right arms. Over 20 members of the U.S. Senate declared their outrage at the defunding of Planned Parenthood. Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York personally promised to make up much of the funding. Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards saw a golden opportunity and made the most of it—with increased donations to Planned Parenthood mixed with cries of outrage. Feminist groups announced cancelations of Komen events and threatened further retaliation.
On Friday, Komen declared its unconditional surrender: "We want to apologize to the American public for recent decisions that cast doubt upon our commitment to our mission of saving women's lives. The events of this week have been deeply unsettling for our supporters, partners and friends and all of us at Susan G. Komen. We have been distressed at the presumption that the changes made to our funding criteria were done for political reasons or to specifically penalize Planned Parenthood. They were not."
The 'Handicap Icon' Gets New Life
Sidelining the Stigma of Mental Illness
Not part of the community? Subscribe now, or register for a free account.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Newsletters
Google
Join the Conversation
Displaying 1–5 of 12 comments
See all comments
NDM
Reading the responses to articles like these is heartbreaking due to the lack of compassion for women who have felt that they have no other choice but to have an abortion. It is not an easy choice and I seriously doubt that any woman or teenage girl who has ever been faced with this choice relished the idea/experience of doing it. Yet, there rarely ever seems to be any degree of care for these women or their circumstances. Are you writing/advocating as strongly against incest, sexual assault, domestic violence, lack of access to adequate health care or the myriad of issues that can lead a woman down this path? Just wondering. My words don't come with malice, just seeking to understand.
John H. Guthrie
Roe v. Wade didn't save American women from back alley abortions. After Roe, the back alley abortionists were free to operate in plain sight. And they probably went to work for Planned Parenthood.
Tim
You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't say that you are pro-life and believe that murder is ever right. Women may be caught between a rock and a hard place many many times but that doesn't mean that abortion is their only way out? If you are truly pro-life, abortion isn't even one choice among many for escape. Murdering people is never right no matter how complex you want to make your morality. And for the record...morality is not individual. It is corporate. No society in all of history ever really believed that morality was individual until now. But what's more, God actually determines morality which means that morality is incumbent on all human life by their Creator. His law is written on their hearts.
Tim
You people are unbelievable. Everyone talks about the millions of unwanted pregnancies that they prevent. I would be REALLY interested where you get that figure?? Talk about sensationalism! That just isn't true and what's more, does that justify murdering 329,000 people? So is it always good to do wrong in order to do right? PP doesn't care about woman's health they care about agenda. Besides, how can we possibly make the call about who's life is more valuable. Billy, you're right to say that morality is not that simply but that argument works against you. It's not that simple to say that we didn't want "it" or that "it" was unwanted so we can kill "it". The bottom line is that most of you don't believe these babies being ripped apart is actually just that...babies. Would it be right to commit genocide so that another race can continue to exist? Because abortion is the same thing.
chaliapin
I am strongly opposed to abortion!!! But I am also opposed to forcing women into "back alley" abortions that can and do destroy the woman or the woman's life. That is what we had before the Supreme Court passed Roe vs. Wade. Morality is not some corporate decision. Morality is individual, and cannot be legislated. This problem of abortion is the result of big money buying ads, movies, etc. that teach children that sex is fine when it is consensual. Marriage is just "a piece of paper." Many parents spend so much time earning money that they have little time to influence their children in their developement of faith and morality. My heart goes out to the people of the Komen foundation who are damned regardless of which way they go. I do not agree with everything that Planned Parenthood does, but they are often the only group to help women caught between the proverbial rock and hard place. Walk in the moccasins of those women before you condemn.